> I want to skip over the static typing benefits argument, because I think it is well understood that static typing is a good thing
The OP is interesting in talking about how much of a pain in the ass TS tooling is, and... it's fair to say it's annoying.
If you accept that static types are good (and the OP explicitly said they do), then what are going to do? Basically the OP is saying, "I want static types but not the TSC compiler or ecosystem"; well... it sucks, but you're never going to get that.
The comment you're replying to is just saying: "Well, if you want static types, you gotta live with the bad stuff".
> Doesn't your counter-argument beg the question whether it is indeed 20% BS vs. 80% value?
Nope.